Oi Nick and Margaret, We Pay Your Wages!

happytopaybenefitsProfessional arse-licker Nick Hewer (@Nick_Hewer) knows all about scrounging money from the tax payer.  Recently he was part of an £3.5 million ad campaign to promote DWP pension reforms.  As viewers of The Apprentice will know, Hewer is not the type of man to bite the hand that feeds him.  This is perhaps one reason why last night’s documentary – unpleasantly called We Pay Your Benefits – portrayed a benefits system that is a million miles away from the one experienced by most claimants in their daily lives.

When not fleecing the DWP, Hewer, along with co-presenter Margaret Mountford are both on the take from the television licence payer.  Both have been paid handsomely for a string of publicly funded TV shows – which is nice work if you can get it, if you can call it work, which you can’t.

Being a volunteer youth worker, or a single parent is work, yet there was no recognition of this in last night’s programme.  Instead low paid workers were pitted against claimants in a tragic race to the bottom.  Seeing someone on shit wages themselves condemning someone for giving their children two meals a day was genuinely shocking.  Elsewhere this claimant was judged for having a dog, and a hamster.  It is difficult to know what conditions the children would have had to be living in to satisfy the ‘tax payer’ brought in to scrutinise the spending of a struggling single mum.

Low paid workers and benefit claimants should be on the same side, not least because many low paid workers are benefit claimants.  This point was sadly neglected by last night’s programme along with the fact that benefit claimants are also tax payers.

Perhaps the biggest problem with the show was that it only showed one side of the story.  The young graduate – who is far likelier to get his hoped for career by volunteering as a youth worker than by working in a pound shop – is in no way typical of hundreds of thousands of young people desperate for any job.  The programme didn’t show the endless Jobcentre harassment that young unemployed people face, the thousands of unpaid workfare workers or the desperation faced by those with just £56.80 a week to live on and who don’t have a supportive family member who pays the bills.

Whilst there was a brief nod to child poverty, with one family shown to be dependent on food banks, there were no families living in B&Bs not knowing even which city they might end up in due to the benefit cap.  And there was no sign of the people who have seen meagre incomes almost cut in half because of the bedroom tax and council tax benefit reforms or no mention of those left with nothing at all due to benefit sanctions.

Whether by accident or design, this programme could not have been a better piece of propaganda for Nick Hewer’s former employers at the DWP.  Once again the message was clear, unemployment is a personal moral failing and not the fault of a fucked economy.  Not once was it pointed out that you cannot fit two and a half million unemployed people into half a million vacancies.  Whilst the frustration of the ‘tax payers’ in the show was milked for all it was worth, none of them seemed to want to swap their lives with those of the claimants.

If social security was abolished it would be a disaster for low paid workers, who are the most vulnerable to periods of unemployment.  If not having a job meant starvation – rather than just nagging hunger as is increasingly the case  – then employers would have even more freedom to treat low paid staff like dirt and slash wages.  Any privatised insurance scheme which replaced the benefits system would cost far more for far less protection – social security is good value for everyone but the rich. 

Benefit bashing often seems to have become the UK’s favourite blood sport, as people lash out in vengeance at those beneath them for their own shit finances. And fuck all that dignity of work crap, there is nothing dignified about working all the hours God sends, never seeing your kids, and being paid a pittance for the privilege by some laughing boy billionaire like Alan Sugar.  It’s a shit deal and most people know it.  No-one who wins the lottery really carries on working at ASDA.  Instead of looking down their nose at claimants, perhaps it’s time people started to look at who is really getting rich on the back of our work.

One incident last night showed that not everyone is intent on demolishing the welfare state so the rich can fuck us even harder.  The hashtag #happytopayyourbenefits emerged on twitter shortly after the programme ended and quickly began to trend.  Hundreds, if not thousands of people voiced their support for social security.  It was emotional.  You had to be there.

Follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid

149 responses to “Oi Nick and Margaret, We Pay Your Wages!

  1. Social security is also good value for the rich. It acts as an automatic stabiliser for the economy – minimising the impact of the downturns and stimulating growth as income is recycled in the economy. Reduced inequality also benefits everyone in a society – including the richest. This is one of the main reason that everyone should support the introduction of a living wage (and benefit increases) but unfortunately the economic literacy of the population is incredibly poor so too few understand this.

    • Its good value for the rich as it lessens the likleyhood of us mugging the fucking wankers and robbing their houses and cars so we can eat

      • That’s an extremely valid point… and one that even the thickest of the bourgeoisie/toffs should be able to grasp. And it’s probably cheaper than a fancy security system as well!

        • It needs to be iterated time and again, that if unemployment benefit was restored to it’s 1979 level it would be around the £130 a week. It should also be renamed as UB and the rules for UB readopted – conditionality was there, in that you had to be available for work in order to claim UB, but were trusted to be making an effort, plus the Jobcentre in the old days did often make an effort in finding suitable work for an unemployed person. But then, it was a much more caring society then.

    • The population are not running the economy the government is, so if social security is a stabiliser then why is Osborne cutting social security and other benefits? Put the blame where it belongs on government and the media also, who are encouraging these low life that are just one step above the poorest, but think they can condemn them without a backward glance even though they are being exploited with low wages and benefit top ups – idiots.

      • Why is Osborne cutting social security and other benefits? Because a) he is amongst the economically illiterate and does not understand the economic value of social security for all and/or b) austerity is purely an ideological excuse to sell off the state and economics plays no part in his decision making.

  2. Excellent and needed reply to that acrimonious anti-poor progaganda that I saw vomitted onto my television screen last night. The age old issue of ‘someone shouldn’t be better off on benefits than in work’ was perpetuated but the low paid workers featured on this programme failed to mentioned that their wages were too low. One worker even boasted working 60 hours a week as a carer which saw her pick up a disgraceful £1300 a month. A sickening example of Britain’s exploited workforce, but, instead, it was used to demonise the even more poor, the even more destitute. In fairness, they highlighted the proportion of the welfare state budget spent on unemployed benefit as small but these positive representations were few and far between. Thanks for writing and highlighting this important issue.

  3. Pingback: Oi Nick and Margaret, We Pay Your Wages! | Welf...

  4. Unfortunately, I did not see the programme, maybe just as well, as I am
    getting really depresses with all that this government is constantly doing
    to denigrate the vulnerable. I will NOT watch The Apprentice ever again!

  5. I also noticed the convenient avoidance of the problem of child care. One of the ‘taxpayers’ recalled that when she was as young as primary school age she would be coming home to an empty house while her mother was at work and had to make her own tea. So she would have been under 12. This was presented as a great and noble thing rather than the alarm call to social services that it would be today. I’m sure that if most single parents could earn a decent wage between the hours of 9 and 3 and not have to fork out for childcare then they’d be happy to take those jobs: problem is they don’t exist. Low paid jobs that fit round school hours are only ever worthwhile when there’s another adult earning as well.
    And as you rightly say Johnny, being a parent is a job in itself. Truly vile programme, shameful.

    • My youngest sister unashamedly brought her children up whilst on benefits as she strongly believes that the only way to bring up the next generation of workers with any hope of them having decent social values was to be there for them. Bringing up three children as a single parent is more than a full-time job. As soon as she was able, my sister then got a job in the care sector, (the only growth sector in the more than usually distorted west Wales economy) and has worked hard and is now a housekeeper at a care home. Both her daughters, brought up in what most would consider a deprived upbringing have real values, and are both working, and have always worked since leaving school in an area with few jobs – they too work in the care sector.

      These moralistically misguided people don’t seem to realise that childcare costs alone would cancel out any benefit acquired by working. It’s far cheaper, and far more rationally justified that parents are supported to bring up their own children rather than insisting on some morally dubious notion that working to support some imposed work ethic, especially one that pays you peanuts and exploits you to the point where you have to work 60 hours a week to make ends meet, is somehow more honourable. The carer person in the programme needs to be re-educated somewhat in order that she gets some sense of real self-worth and start demanding decent pay so that she could do right by her kids and spend some more time with them.

      But sadly too many parents make the mistake that buying their kids the latest in everything is what is required. Nice though that might be, most kids would be much happier that their parents spent more time with them.

      • Totally agree with your comments regarding stay at home parents sibrydionmawr, why have children then leave them for others to raise especially when leaving them to work for peanuts?

  6. Excellent blog about this shameful program, as a friend of one of the “scrounger” it was both funny to see him on TV and bloody sickening to see how they were trying to portray him.
    Heres my take on the program : http://spamfish23.wordpress.com/2013/07/12/another-bbc-program-demonising-benefit-claiments-only-this-time-its-personal/

  7. I’d like to thank all the tweeters on #happytopayyourbenefits for restoring my faith in humanity, after a depressingly predictable bit of divide and rule propaganda from the BBC.

  8. Bloody rich millionaires at it again. no real idea FARCE. Stick to bloody Countdown Nick [not so good at that either]

  9. I read some of the tv reviews…the grauniad said the program was a finger pointing exercise and waste of time…and shock horror the torygraph was almost even handed the faily mail mumbled a feel words…not the typical right wing rant i had expected..the BBC was trying and failing to shatter preconceptions about unemployment and laziness ie skiver vs striver routine..next part is the patronising showing the unemployed lot what it like to have a.job and work as if Its like learning a foreign language..” oh look i have to get out of bed early and spend eight hours every day and look you get paid more money than the dile…Its amazing…i never knew that..
    You can almost hear the daily hate club cheering and saying ” at last they can see what its like…weirdly enough they will see it as some form of punishment..odd that work as punishment for being unemployed…funny that ppl who bang on about scroungers always seen to have jobs they hate..they are always moaning about it.

    • “You can almost hear the daily hate club cheering and saying ” at last they can see what its like…weirdly enough they will see it as some form of punishment..odd that work as punishment for being unemployed…funny that ppl who bang on about scroungers always seen to have jobs they hate..they are always moaning about it.”

      That’ll be the ressentiment that will.

  10. Another hour of point-and-gasp dressed up as useful insight to keep a couple of Name faces on our screens and justify the salaries they are paid. Speaking of which, Nick and Margaret: We All Effectively Pay Your Wages, so if you could try a bit harder it would be much appreciated.

  11. I looked at last nights show in disgust. The licence fee payer being shoveled more Etonian propaganda the fucking arse wipes.
    I’ve just had an ATOS assessment following surgery on a broken ankle and you know the result, Of course, I’m alive so therefore, Fit for work! Nothing to to do with the endless rounds of puking and dizziness due to the onslaught of prescription drugs.
    It is assumed that people claiming shit pence a week to live on from the DWP should not have nice possessions…. My home is well decorated, furnished an has modern gadgets…. all paid from before I was on benefits so come on cunts who are ya to tell me that I should be living in shit?
    I must confess to having a virgin media subscription but in this digital by default age who hasn’t? I stopped drinking and smoking to afford it on the punitive bullshit money I may / may not receive every 2 weeks. OH, I pay my tv licence too. Looking forward to being homeless as defend my fit to work ruling with no other income whatsoever.

    Has anyone ever appealed? How long did it take? How can you get an income?(is there some sort of hardship allowence?)
    As for Nick Hewer and Mountford, fuck off and let some young journo get a bit of experience on the back of the tossers at the BBC.

    • Yes you will get appeal rate ESA whilst you appeal, it’s £71 a week, from experience it takes about a year to appeal, if you fail the appeal and you have valid legal grounds to take it to the higher tribunals (and do so), that takes roughly another year, they will stop your appeal rate ESA if you do this, but apply for ESA again as it will effectively be over 6 months since your last ESA claim was closed, hope this helps and good luck.

    • “As for Nick Hew and Mountford, fuck off and let some young journo get a bit of experience on the back of the tossers at the BBC”, love this comment especially as most of the presenters are long past retirement age, although I love Andrew Neil who by and large takes the mick out of politics(he can afford to) even though the daily politics he presents are totally bias towards the right.

  12. The thing that struck me most was what nice people the claimants were, while one couldn’t say that for all the taxpayers . . .

    Those who watched the programme on before this one (about food poverty) probably ended up being more sympathetic.

  13. I didn’t dare watch this as I just KNEW I’d end up bursting a blood vessel or sticking my boot through the TV – and possibly both! Judging from the above I made the right choice!

  14. Ive never understood that contradiction..” i got where i am today through hard work” and yet the work program using ‘ hard work’ is used as punishment. Presumably by being on work program would mean you would acheive something…like what?
    Another thought..ie the corporate state as i call it. Take for example mobile phone opetators and all the stupid rules customers are given..you cant do this you cant have that..if they were a govt department people would be protesting..but since Its the ‘ market’ we put up with it all…

    Yet there they are controlling how we communicate…Its very odd.

  15. Has Countdown got a twitter and facebook and all that gubbins?

    Perhaps we should flood that too in protest!

    I thought he was a good guy, he says some interesting things on Countdown.

    I haven’t seen the programme talked about here, is it on the beeb?
    Was he really harsh?

    If so it should be on iplayer.

    Money stopped for 4 weeks today! Advised to put a GL24 in asap. Don’t even wait for the brown envelope.

    Not doing enough to look for work. No jobs applied for in my last jobSEEKING period!!!!! I contend this is not sanctionable.

    Since when does that stop them? A sick joke.

  16. You cant just be poor you have to be seen as poor..Its opposite of visible wealth and opulence..maybe it will catch on and become competitive on who is more poorer than everyone else..monty python four yorkshiremen sketch.

  17. I got as far as the title sequence! 2 minutes of skint people in jobs bashing skinter people without jobs whilst 2 millionaires swanned about pretending to give a fuck. No thanks. What depresses me is a lot of people have really swallowed the ‘shirkers v strivers’ bollocks. Why aren’t these people angry at bankers and politicians? what is wrong with these people? Morons.

    Hey Seafarerasoton as soon as you get sanctioned put in for a hardship payment. I had a 4 week sanction, I got nothing for the first 2 weeks (BASTARDS!) but then got £83 quid for the last 2 weeks of it, it’s crap but better than nothing. I asked for a reconsideration but (surprise surprise) lost. However if you chose to appeal, after the ‘reconsideration’ which you’ll probably lose you can appeal further, ask for a GL24 form. You may win that but apparently it takes ages to go through in the meantime defo get on the hardship. Best of luck to you.

    • LOL your quote sums it up perfectly “skint people in jobs bashing skinter people without jobs whilst 2 millionaires swanned about pretending to give a fuck. “

    • Always appeal, you may not succeed, but you also might, but either way it clogs up the system and is a valid way of combating this policy. Most sanctions aren’t appealed, and I believe that most sanction doubts raised by Workfare providers that result in a sanction don’t even follow the DWPs relatively idiot-proof directions. There is a pretty strictly defined way in which they can write a Jobseeker’s Direction or mandate, and mostly they get that wrong.

      My provider at the moment asks me to do things in preparation for every fortnightly visit, but has now started to merely issuing me with a letter stating the date and time of the next appointment, with no mention of the ‘required’ task… Basically I could ‘fail’ to do the task, and then in theory I’d be open to a sanction doubt, but if it resulted in a sanction I would appeal and the sanction would be overturned as there would be no alternative under the DWP rules.

  18. All the programme highlighted was that low wages, not just benefits are the issue, MP’s are alright with their 11% pay rises though hey, would love to see a programme where one of them live off either benefits or min/low wages for a week!

  19. It was pointed out that mostró welfare spending went on pensions..how ironic to see benefit bashing faily express have a campaign to support pensioners…now why would they do that if not to deflect attention away from that little fact of welfare spending in order to justify their benefit scrounger campaign..

  20. Another Fine Mess

    I noticed the workers on low pay and long hours weren’t complaining about the fact their pay was too low, instead they wanted benefits reduced. Idiots!

    • It was the certain knowledge that Brits have this self-loathing mindset that enabled the Tories to stand a chance of getting this war on claimants off the ground in the first place.

  21. I’ve made a complaint to the BBC regarding this programme, I’d suggest others to do it as well, if you haven’t already.

    They need to know that this propaganda is unacceptable.

  22. overburdenddonkey

    afm…they seem to think if we get less then they will benefit…fools jobs are falling out of our economy at an alarming rate…

  23. They may as well have put the unemployed people on that “documentary” in
    a set of medieval stocks,threw vegetables at them and had done with it. It was a disgrace of a show,at least the twitter happy to pay your benefits shows that a lot of people are not taken in by this BBC propaganda BS.

  24. I too watch countdown but can’t stand Nick Hewer who comes across as a sneering snob. I would rather have seen Tom O’ Connor who used to present the brilliant programme ‘cross wits’ and could have done a much better job that Des O’Connor when he was presenting countdown.

  25. Arbeitsscheu_UK

    Glad I gave up buying a license and took a hammer to the TV, sick of funding the fascist glove-puppet BBC, as I no longer feel tempted to watch shit like this. When I jacked it in I thought I would still watch programs on the iplayer, I did so for a couple of weeks but found myself abandoning them half way through so I no longer bother trying. I can honestly say I don’t miss TV one bit. Give it a go…free yourself.
    As for the tax payer versus the claimant, we are all fucking tax payers, what is VAT if not a tax? Or duty on fuel etc. Just what percentage of benefits, pensions, tax credits and so on, are giving with one hand and taken straight back with the other? Subtract that amount from the overall welfare budget and you would have a greatly reduce and accurate figure, but politicians don’t deal in accurate figures.

    • Never thought about the amount that’s actually taken back from people making the welfare bill smaller.

      I pay just under half of my disability benefits back into the system, firstly to the local authority for my care, then for private care (after they cut my care plan hours last year), and lastly in bedroom tax. It amounts to some £5100 per year.

      Looked at like this, chronically disabled people’s benefits are very low.

  26. Thanks for that link bobchewie. What kind of people see statistics showing mortality rates of the disabled shooting through the roof and cover it up? Did you see that line of crap about ‘ad-hoc statistical analysis’. Not updating the 2011 figures because they have blood on their hands. Evil low-life psychopathic scum.

  27. it’s not really true that they have ditched these statistics, they were an ad hoc analysis, meaning they weren’t part of the usual stats the DWP produces or is required to produce, They were produced in response to an FOI request so there may be some room to find out the latest figures via that route, although it looks like they are trying to dodge that on grounds of cost.

    It may also be possible to pressure them into it, but technically, I’m afraid it doesn’t look like the DWP have broken any rules or done anything out of the ordinary on this occasion.

    • Arbeitsscheu_UK

      I understood that in response to an FOI request the authority only has to supply recorded information that is already held, I don’t think they are required to correlate new information, rather the time and therefore the cost comes from searching for the information rather than producing it. That’s only my understanding of the situation, could be wrong. Perhaps these ad hoc figures had already been produced for some reason therefore they had to supply them.
      As to the grounds of cost the requester can refine his request to limit the time scale for the information he is requesting, ie request figures for a month instead of a year, and others can then make requests to get the info for the other months. The authority is supposed to assist and advise the requester to help in limiting the scope of the request to fit within the cost limit.

      • the stats appeared to come from an FOI request from looking through the document they came in. maybe someone asked and someone got clearance to take a look, they do quite a bit of research so it’s not unusual for them to release reports with statistics of this nature in. agree its unlikely to be possible to force them to do this through an FOI request, although always worth a try i s’pose

    • Johnny in a video on YouTube in house of commons debate on atos. It flashes up 26,000 claimant deaths on screen this is a BBC broadcast so it cant claim that without proof

  28. SELECT SUM(COUNT) FROM DWPTABLE WHERE DateOfDeath<=DateFitForWork+WEEKS(8) AND YEAR(InitialClaimDate)=RANGE(2012-2013)

    There I've given them the basic SQL code, all they have to do anyway is run the same sql they did last time, just change the dates… should take an inhouse department all of 5 mins to edit it and kick it off… however no doubt the problem is that the contracted out company wants half a million quid to do the work it did last year as it was never in the spec. Cnuts!

    • So pump out a load of figures knowing. full well they can be disputed in order for them to be shot down..very sneaky and we fall for that…26,000 seems rather high so ” obviously” there has to be a mistake….classic..

  29. Lets not be mean to Mr Alan Sugar…. after all, the pleb failed to achieve anything at school other than a few mediocre grades at O level, failed to make the grade, and became a mere Barrowboy.

    Quite pathetic, frankly.

  30. This man plays ‘THE DEVILS TUNE’ does he not? His eyes are black like a narcissist. What the flying fuck was his book about. People need to research this man. It really is worrying what is going on.

  31. Thanks for this post johnny, I’ve been livid all day after watching that revolting programme last night. Total hostile anger projections on to the poor benefit claimant, from the underpaid workers. They have deep rooted anger that should be directed at the shit economy and greedy gangster style government. After all they work all those hours and still can not afford luxury’s such as hamsters, dogs and fucking whole chickens with bones in. I mean really!!!! I am so glad that hard working mum had a go back at the skinny mouthy angry little wretch of a women. Yes single parents do have a Job don’t they. Its the most important job any one can do in this world.

    • I gave in and watched it on the ‘Tinternet, the BBC still wont see MY money
      I’m glad im not the only one to point out this, Jasmine
      “What do you contribute to society? ” asked one harridan of the single father
      He looked non plused, groping for an answer
      He should have said – my contribution is bringing up these kids to the best of my ability, despite scum like you casting aspersions
      I defy anyone to say those kids wernt looked after and fed well , judging by what we saw. That’s His full time job, and he’s doing sterling work.

      The woman doing 60 hours, who the fuck is bringing up HER kids, or are they expected to drag themself up?

      • I am brining up my kids thank you! If you listened to what it said it states I can work up to 60 hours a week not that I always do! Unfortunately I do a job that is extermely important as it lets people who need extra help remain in their own homes with out carers they are forced to live where they do not want to. Due to too many people not wanting to do care work when there are 100s of care jobs out there puts more pressure on us that do it just so these people can enjoy the rest of their lifes where they want to be. My kids are my world and I do everything for them. All my time is with them when im not working. Unfortunately the bbc deleted alot and the fact I changed my hours of work for my kids etc was not shown. You go on about how we are judging the claimant when u are actually doing the same about me. I actually got on really well with liam and we had a lot of respect for each other but of course the bbc wont show that! dont ever judge on something you know nothing about!

        • Another Fine Mess

          “Due to too many people not wanting to do care work when there are 100s of care jobs out there”
          There doesn’t seem to be that many.
          http://www.reed.co.uk/jobs/ipswich?keywords=care%20assistant
          Why doesn’t the JCP/WP train unemployed as care workers if there’s 100s of vacancies, instead of retail workers where’s there’s already 1000s of applicants.

        • Can you really call it care work that you say you do? my friend does this work too and hates her job because she is lucky if she gets to spend an hour cleaning and trying to prepare a small meal then has to rush off to another house as well as make reports on the client regarding health and wellbeing.
          Time is money to these private contractors and quality of care is sadly lacking whether the sick and elderly are in their own homes or in privately run homes. Building shoe boxes to put the elderly and disabled in makes life quick and easy for these so called care workers to nip in and nip out after a quick wipe round.

        • thanks for commenting SH, can folk keep any responses civil please, we are on the same side, or at least we should be.

          • JV well it didn’t sound like we are all on the same side. If SH did not like the editing why did she agree to the programme, because let’s face it even before I watched some of it, I knew what it was going to be about,the clue was in the title. She needs to get clued up especially about who cares for who, because the cared for are keeping her in a job out of their pension or disability benefits.
            The most atrocious was the way the single parents and unemployed were talked down to, but God forbid someone talks down to them. Edited or not this programme was pure propoganda.

            • I know it didn’t, but fair enough to her for commenting and would be interesting to hear what else she’s got to say, also am off to bed and don’t want to wake up to a big fight on here😉

          • No one is against low paid..why didnt the BBC show the comfortably off middle class daily hate mail workers vs the claimants..if any of the daily hate mailers saw the reality them maybe we would see sense.. i feel this was a softer option..and not typical of what we face..

        • SH
          I am sorry for what I said. You are not wretched but you do did seem angry and you have the right, you should be being paid more, this is wrong. You have a nice figure, sorry I called you skinny. Good to be slim. I am just so worried sick at the moment. I had a bad accident a while ago. I am in a lot of pain, I need surgery but can not afford to be this vulnerable again. My ESA has been reduced, I simply can not afford to have this operation and be incapacitated again. I am a single parent with no family support what so ever. My family are abusive. I actually use to do care work before my accident. I am just sick with worry sorry again.

          I did not like the way they called that poor single dad who was poorly , they called him rather hopeless. He was just being a good dad. I am sure you are a great mum S H. Johnny is right we all should be on the same side. Look what is happening the out of work and low paid all arguing. It just felt you begrudged the single parent her few little pets she had to make her kids happy that is all. I am sure she will find work when the kids are old enough.

        • Unfortunately the BBC won’t show that because it doesn’t fit their agenda.

          This programme was never going to be anything but another whitewash against the poor. It’s divide and rule, the oldest trick in the book.

          None of the conclusions the show wants us to draw address or even help people to understand the bigger picture in the face of mass austerity.

          Liam was introduced, in the edit, surrounded by fruit machines in a pub (as were most of the ‘scroungers’).

          Luther will have inadvertently put his ESA claim under dire risk by allowing himself to be filmed working. I doubt auntie cares.

          So by all accounts next week we see Liam struggle to work as a carer. But this shouldn’t surprise you or anyone; suddenly putting a complete stranger into a job as stressful and hard as carework can be and expecting him to succeed with flying colours is unreasonable. So of course he will be seen as flaky which is exactly the sort of quality the governemtn wants us to believe ‘welfare’ breeds in people.

          I couldn’t work as a carer and i doubt people wold want to be cared for by peopel that are only doing it for money. The problem that needs addressing is the industry. This is vital work, but does our austerity hungry governmet care? No, they want more profit hungry wage slave hiring privateers on the case.

        • To SH,

          It shouldn’t really be any surprise that you are being judged, since you took part in a programme that was all about judging.

          Perhaps you should be campaigning for better wages and conditions in the care work industry rather than lambasting those on benefits? I know how manipulative programme makers can be, and as they say, it’s all in the edit. But you did come across as angry, jealous and judgemental towards Liam, despite the mutual respect you now claim.

          Why do you think Agencies have a hard time recruiting workers?

          In care work, the pay and hours can be awful. Many care worker agencies offer the most dreadful and unlawful conditions and little, if any real training. They further stress their employees by giving them schedules where they simply cannot offer a good standard of care.

          Not everyone is capable of doing care work and some people should be kept well away from any vulnerable people because they simply do not have the empathy required. Getting the right people for the job is essential, as evidenced by the numerous cases of abuse that are so often reported. Better that someone stays away from the care sector, than ends up in a job where they abuse a vulnerable individual don’t you think?

          Individuals have a choice too. If they don’t feel comfortable doing care work then they shouldn’t be pressured into it. Pressuring people to do jobs that they are ill suited to, never results in a good outcome. In care work, the risks of harm to the vulnerable is high. All it takes for a vulnerable individual to come to harm is one moment of impatience at the hands of a care worker. I don’t need to be any more explicit than that.

          Forcing individuals into work they aren’t suited does not result in you being financially better off does it? The reality for many who are being forced into (sometimes unpaid work via mandation to the Work Programme) is pretty grim, and I challenge you to truly educate yourself beyond whatever propaganda you have swallowed. This will help you understand why, on sites such as The Void, the attitude of many on benefits is so full of suspicion and loathing of those who judge them.

          You have swallowed a warped ideology, lies and manipulation because it takes less effort than actually doing a bit of research and learning what a whopping pile of stink you are being told by the government.

          During the programme, you and the other “hard working tax payers” implied that those on benefits are simply lazy. I find your mute acceptance of the governmental propaganda to be lazier.

          Care work should have a higher status in our society, but because it suffers from being labelled as “women’s work” it’s unlikely that it ever will have an appropriate level of respect paid to it given the current selfish state of our culture. This attitude to care work extends to nursing, teaching and even to those who work in laboratories in the in the NHS.

          I’m sorry you feel that you were edited to show you in this poor light, alas, it’s the nature of the programme makers to get what they want and to cherry pick footage that illustrates whatever ideology they are tasked with representing.

          I found the programme to be reprehensible, mostly for the way it relentlessly hammered those unfortunate enough to be surviving on benefits. But I do recognise that the “hard working taxpayers” who took part were exploited as well.

          Next time you get asked to take part in a benefits bashing, Daily Mail extravaganza, think twice about taking part. You will be doing yourself and those you judge so harshly, a big favour.

          Lucy

          • I totally agree with you Lucy. These programmes manipulate those who believe they are helping a situation, but in fact they are used to control public opinion.
            About the ‘care’ industry, I have witnessed the way care agencies treat their home carers, but also how some carers are not fit for the job, they are not trained properly, especially with regard to people suffering from progressive dementia; and abuse of these vulnerable people can be appalling!

        • Care work is indeed plentiful, but doesn’t get that many takers as it is generally so badly paid, casual (zero hour contracts, or part-time) and often workers don’t have enough time to do a decent, caring job. Sadly it’s a sector where workers are terribly exploited, partly as one commentator says, because it’s seen as ‘women’s work’ (reflecting poor pay) and probably wide open to a lot of bullying on the part of private sector employers. It’s probably also a sector that is hard to organise on a trade union basis, (and let’s face it, in the care sector generally the mainstream unions are pretty useless) as workers have little contact with each other.

          Johnny is correct in reminding us that we are on the same side, and though the criticism is understandable, we should all be making an effort to make sure that we remain civil and respectful. Hatred only breeds yet more hatred.

          I’d suggest considering joining a union such as the IWW as it’s a union where the workers decide how it’s run rather than paid officials.

        • Arbeitsscheu_UK

          People will judge you on the evidence they are presented with, if that evidence is inaccurate due to the BBC take it up with them, if you just roll over and let them misrepresent you like that what can you expect really?

          • Somebody participating in a televised extravaganza in judgement, going on to complain that they themselves become judged…
            I’m sure there’s a word for that

            • I think the word you’re looking for is HYPOCRITE.To tell the truth I didn’t watch the programme, maybe I’ll force myself to with the iplayer., but from what I’ve read it appears the “strivers” sound like a bunch of sour losers, a hairbreaths away from being unemployed themselves & they have the bare-faced cheek to tear apart the lives of those with even less than themselves. Cunts.

      • Hello Ulysses

        Yes it was all very vile towards the single parents I thought. It really upset me. The poor bloke, I really felt sorry for him. He was a good dad. he should be proud of himself for being a good dad. Think his back is playing him up too. I’ve just said sorry to S H. We seem to have been told off by Johnny boy there. Lol. Do you think its the real lady from the show? Its all getting rather strange. That programme made me want to throw up. The stuck up old toffs doing it made be want to be sick. What about the toilet roll talk at the food bank. They were shocked, but think they had no idea really.

  32. This programme represents the usual BBC propaganda. Now here’s a thought, why don’t the Con Dems privatise the BBC? Oh no they won’t do that will they because they need them to perpetuate the Tory myth and act as their mouthpeice!

  33. UniversalPoverty

    Johnny its a shame you didnt highlight the school dinners conversation on the show as a prime example of some of these peoples perverse views, god help them if they ever need help and support.
    I cant remenber the exact conversation im sure someone on here will have a more accurate discription of events but the taxpayer asks if the ladies child gets a school meal (a hot one ) the lady says yes then tells her that her child also recives a hot meal when they get home, the taxpayers face changed immediatly and she commented that she couldent belive the child got two meals (hot ones ) a day says it all really.

    • I noticed that Universalpoverty. You were correct, I am afraid. I was shocked at this comment too. Thank god this lady was being a great mum feeding her children their deserved meals. A child should have three meals a day. Children all over the country are going hungry now. There have been many reports of SCURVY coming back. This is very dangerous. Children should never be malnourished.

  34. “Silver River is a place where ideas and originality are prized, where on and off-screen talent is sought out and nurtured and where taking a
    concept to the screen in the most entertaining way possible is a top priority.”
    http://www.silverriver.tv/about-silver-river-tv-people-uk/the-company/

    ‘BBC’s DOCUMENTARY ABOUT POLES FROM IPSWICH…’ (24/2/2013)
    http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.doncarski.co.uk%2Fpolacy-w-doncaster-wiadomosci%2Fz-uk%2F532-bbc-robi-film-dokumentalny-o-polakach-z-ipswich-szuka-bohaterow.html&hl=en&langpair=auto

  35. It’s less than 40 years since the publically funded broadcaster showed some guts by commissioning real-life dramas such as “Days of Hope”, “The Spongers” and “Boys From The Blackstuff”. Today, there’s about as much chance of the BBC producing plays and films that questioned the establishment order as there is of Eric Pickles fitting into a Smart car – or even a Smart car surving a collission with Eric Pickles.

    It’s a shame, of course. Maybe it’s just another instance of the age-old discussion on whether broadcasters shape public opinion or whether they simply report it. A recent example of this was the apparent conflict between
    the workers and shirkers or the curtain twitchers and the curtain drawers.

    When a spoilt bastard Tory Chancellor utters unfounded shite about unemployed people drawing curtains during the day, and a few hours later the exact same words are parrotted by a low paid worker on a BBC news report – well, can you put that down to a remarkable coincidence ?

    Come on state broadcaster, us unemployed types pay the licence fee as well. Let’s have some grown up debates about contemporary social issues; and while we’re about it let’s not be a propaganda channel for this government or any other government.

    Your audience figures may drop a little but so will your testicles.

    • “or even a Smart car surving a collission with Eric Pickles”

      Personally speaking, I’d like to test that assumption . . .

    • What happened to channel 5 super scrounger broadcast ? The one that was going to show the ” typical lives of claimants” with the scum newspaper making a big thing about it..was it shelved ? Btw i will find that video on youtube it clearly flashes up 26 000 claimanant deaths on screen

  36. Feed the kids the family pets, but don’t let them eat chicken!

    When entering the home of a scrounger, it is polite to enquire as to the nature of their white goods and how they came by them.

    Volunteering is scrounging.

    Family life is not as important as working.

    Those that work more hours and earn lower wages are better human beings than others.

    It is acceptable to play darts while unemployed.

    Supporting your kids is a poor role model unless you are kept away from them by finacnial stress and long hours.

    It is good to emasculate unemployed fathers, better still if they are made to cry.

    One should, at all times, be jealous of what other’s own.

  37. This programme came out not 24 hours later on from the IPSA pay rise decision. Coincedence?

  38. “Swap their lives with those of the claimants” Can’t remember now how many times i’ve put this challenge down in the comments of.the Daily Heil after they’ve run a usually nasty story about benefit claimants. Up till now I’ve had no takers. Wonder why, when as we’re so often told that life on benefits is so cushy & claimants have all the luxuries under the sun such as the mythical “52 inch plasma telly”
    Didn’t watch this particuarly unpleasant piece of propaganda, the trailer was enough to get my blood boiling, I’d have smashed the telly to bits. The BBC ought to be ashamed of themselves for making this vile programme, benefit claimants pay the TV tax, as a tax it is, too!

  39. Biased BBC Propaganda, I used to respect the BBC but not anymore. I actually wrote to the BBC to ask why they are NOT reporting on the crisis that is the welfare state & why they see fit to cover demonstrations in other Counties but no mention of the ones that are occurring up and down the UK. When I saw this program I thought at last the BBC are actually doing something but alas NO… I should have known better.. What hurts the most is I am paying the BBC for this drivel..

  40. My old telly gave up the ghost a few months’ back and I deliberated for all of a few seconds on whether I should replace it. Nah, I thought, why pay the right-wing Beeb’s licence fee in order for it to spew out ever more distasteful anti-working class propaganda while posing as an “impartial” broadcasting outfit. (The other channels aren’t much better it has to be said.) So no more having to be subjected to the likes of this unpleasant trash that was shown last night.

    Now, where’s that web address for White Dot, the international campaign against television…?

  41. Trevor

    Television has it’s place and is one of the finest inventions, it’s the programme makers and tv companies that are the problem.

  42. Pingback: Oi Nick and Margaret, We Pay Your Wages!

  43. Don’t forget they came to Ipswich. Nick phoned me (Ipswich Unemployed Action) and tried to get me in the show. I had no idea of who he was but when he said what it was about I could smell a rat and refused to have anything to do with them. The shows relates to Ipswich reality from a great lordly distance.

    • Obi Wan Kenobi

      My god Andy, you should have said yes, you could have properly educated the vast amounts of working people as to what this mega fu*ked up government is all about, especially the war IDS (the architect, and the spin of the DWP to appeal to the middle and working class) has declared on benefit claimants.

  44. What exactly would Hewer or Mountford know about poverty,as niether have obviously any experience of it ? Not only do we pay thier wages, but also their pensions and benefits, scroungers both!

  45. Obi Wan Kenobi

    I’m trying to find the gentleman who first advocated the wefare system, he said something on the lines of ‘a welfare system being set up to look after people who had lost their jobs and/or fallen on hard times/illness’.

    The present unelected government have perverted the original idea of the welfare system beyond recognition.

    • Obi Wan Kenobi

      Forgot to add, the gentleman also advocated that they should have a decent standard of living whilst they were on benefits.

      • obi that’s the problem, too many of them have a decent standard of living and are still claiming benefits on top, but I know this is not what you meant and you were referring to the sick,disabled,unemployed being paid enough to have a decent standard of living off the state and I totally agree.

  46. Obi Wan Kenobi

    Johnny Void:

    This is a bit off topic – however I would like to suggest a topic on the Jobseekers Agreement as it currently stands.

    An agreement would suggest that both parties agree the statements incorporated in a JSA Agrement have legal basis before they agree to the statements and each JSA agreement has to be made out there and then for each individual, also anything the claimant thinks is unreasonable should be removed and not included (due to health conditions or careing for someone under 35 hrs a week) being in their agreement you have to sign.

    NB. – If your current JSA Agreement has restrictions and limited hours on it – make sure your new one states the same, if it doesn’t – get a floor manager over and they will sort it for you.

    • Obi Wan Kenobi

      To make a comparisson – my friend had restictions and hours limited to 16 on his old JSA Agreement due to his doctors instructions, however the little bit*h (and she was a total JCP lacey) who made his new one out didn’t take this into account, he screwed now cause he didn’t look before he signed both copies.

  47. Obi Wan Kenobi

    A musical message to IDS from 1986/87 – Alexander O’Neil – Critisize.

    To paraphrase a line from this video:

    “I can see why you two (IDS and Hoban) are together!

  48. Obi Wan Kenobi

    I think all of the content of this video are apt and relevant to benefit claimants struggle against a Govt. Dept. called the DWP!

    Alex is Mr Cool – Always!

  49. Obi Wan Kenobi

    DWP – we just want what is right – don’t critsize my ideals, ,don’t critisize my lifestyle, all you wanna do is Critisize!

  50. Ok i have checked the video it says the 26,000 estimates was in reponse to a request but why would DWP respond with such a high figure knowing fu/l well the shock that ppl would feel at this figure

  51. Whats wrong with this picture ? A mirror blog tells us that 32 claimants die each week due to welfare. reform whilist 9 out of 10 are in favour of benefit capping ..

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/londoners-support-governments-26000-benefits-cap-8635771.html

    • Obi Wan Kenobi

      Ok Bob – Chill Out buddy – it’s Saturday Night – Up the DWP and up the lot of them, they still can’t take away a little bit of Alex from the Ladies!

      • Obi Wan Kenobi

        I’m not being rude Bob, but the title of the video say’s it all, when it comes to benefit claimants – the bloody govt. have a responsabilty to us all, regardless of the benefit, but their trying to say, ‘Up Yours’ – We will never allow this to happen, they are quite happy to overlook the fact that, you – I – and most people have ‘Worked and paid Taxes so this county can support people on benefits.

        • Obi Wan Kenobi

          Bottom Line:

          If you have worked and paid into the ‘System’ – You have every right by law to claim the benefits due to you – don’t let any little pissant JCP adviser trying to hit a sanction target tell you anything other. – any crap, call a floor manager over.

  52. I took this from another forum post.

    “This one won’t go away for Cameron.

    PM pressed on election guru Lynton Crosby tobacco links

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23301478#

    On Any Questions Grant Shapps, Tory chairman, said that neither Cameron or he had spoken to Crosby. In which case why are they employing him.

    This contradicts what Shapps said. Crosby was with the Tories last week.

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2013/07/exclusive-how-the-tories-plan-to-attack-ukip/

    Crosby runs his lobbying agency for commercial clients alongside his advisory work for Cameron. It all sounds rather murky and will blow up in Cameron’s face like the Coulson tie up.”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jun/08/lynton-crosby-tory-strategy-lobbying-firm

  53. Obi Wan Kenobi

    DWP – VERBAL CONTACT BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS REVEALED!

    The manama song – if anyone can find it!

  54. Hello Johnny was good to meet you. What was noticeable in the protest was the youth of today really do give a fuck more than Mr or Mrs Joe Bloggs. I have never protested about anything before but workfare is an absolute outrage. Due to Mr S. Artois was not able to help much, in fact Mr Artois and Mr Joe strummer are at play right now, oh well! Point is I think you and the people I saw yesterday deserve credit for your stand against these evil bastards and I will be happy to join you good people.

  55. I get to read some dumb shit sometimes..one conservative site claimed that BBC was working with al quaeda ..this prick is on same level but he takes it further by claiming our generous welfare system creates terrorism..

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100085007/why-does-britain-have-an-islamist-problem-while-america-doesnt-answer-the-welfare-state/

  56. Pitting the poor against the poorer is a new blood sport for the Tories and we’ve seen it in droves over the last few years.
    As johnny has pointed out said programme was miles away from a true representation of people who live on benefits and the shit they have to wade through just to even qualify each fortnight.
    BBC propaganda at its finest.

  57. If SH considers she felt camaraderie towards other participants in the programme and was misrepresented in this by the editing of the BBC she really should raise this as a complaint. We are all too aware that the BBC, like the government, pursue an agenda to portray benefits claimants as scroungers and there really is little hope of expecting them to address her concerns as quite frankly they have been demonstrated as being unaccountable over and over again SH should register her objections with the BBC and then also raise them with the main stream media other than the governments propaganda machine.

    • Her posts are here for all to see. Anyone can raise a complaint to the BBC and point to them.

      • Arbeitsscheu_UK

        Trouble is we know full well a BBC employee will do a mock review of the concerns & dismiss them ruling that the BBC acted flawlessly, as usual.

        • Just as they did when they closed the Ouch! forums without carrying out a full Equality Impact Assessment first. And then they demand our respect in return for the utter lack of respect they’ve shown us!

    • I’m waiting for pt. 2 to see where the cameraderie between Liam And SH goes. It was pretty obvious she fancied the arse off him despite herself!

  58. Pingback: The Void on Nick and Margaret’s ‘We Pay Your Wages’. | Beastrabban's Weblog

  59. rainbowwarriorlizzie
  60. Stupid question maybe, but what about making a programme with the same title that shows the amount that benefits recipients receive, with the total given, before then showing how much money politicians claim and how much tax corporations legally avoid paying through loopholes, with the total of that shown? Could be a good way of ending the verbal and physical attacks carried out on us by government encouraged thugs.

    • Johnny (or someone who isn’t camera shy) should start a Youtube channel just for this purpose. Sort of a Daily Mail but actually telling the truth and directing all of the venom towards the rich neo-liberal scum out there. It shouldn’t be downmarket either, like the ranting taxi driver, but should come over as a semi-pro effort at the very least.

      You’ll catch a lot more attention with video than you ever could with words.

  61. Just listened (with difficulty) to the reprehensible Iain [Duncan] Smith spouting venomous bile across the airwaves. Blood pressure almost certainly up (his & mine). On the day the ‘welfare benefit cap’ comes into effect, following an interview with a woman who does not currently have a job but wants one (“wants to work”). She sounded completely ready (“to move into work”) and is having £96 taken (in effect) from her rent monies so instead of being able to work on this, will be concentrating her energies on the usual (having enough food for herself and her family) as on having to contemplate moving away from the community where she plays an active role.

    None of this mattered to the despicable reprobate in the slightest as “the private sector have produced x new jobs and we will help and support her to move into work”. Each of John Humphries’ (repeated) points/questions about the practical day to day realities of what’s being enacted, even including “& what if there is no job?” meant nothing/were deflected with more anti-unemployed-person slating.

    The man is a (sour, sugar-free) fruit loop.

  62. not sure if original comment lost in space; apologies if it appears twice:

    Just listened (with difficulty) to the reprehensible Iain Duncan’t Smith spouting more of his venomous bile across the airwaves. On the day the ‘welfare benefit cap’ comes into effect, and following on from an interview with a woman who doesn’t currently have a job but would like to be in work (gasp!) but isn’t currently able to find one and is about to have £96 effectively removed from her rent monies budget (by him).

    The woman interviewed sounded very much ‘job ready’ (as they like to state) & is active in the community where she clearly sounded settled with her family – the family she wants to support. Instead she will now have to focus most if not all of her energies on the usual – trying to manage enough food/clothes/pay the bills etc. (& it’s not yet winter), contemplate having to move away from the place she lives and then find work in a new, strange place..

    IDS is oblivious; doesn’t care. He simply deflected all of John Humphries’ repeated questions/points about the day-to-day realities/practicalities of what’s being enacted (by him) upon people like “this woman”. (Including “& what if there is no job?”). Replies involving “the private sector have just created X new jobs” and “she will have to get a job [and yes, preferably move]”. With a few extra dollops of anti-unemployed-person slating thrown in for good measure.- just in case anyone hasn’t grasped his (real) motivations yet. Charles Dickens – eat your heart out.

    The man is a despicable (sour and sugar-free) life-wrecking fruit loop.

  63. Just as they did when they closed the Ouch! forums without carrying out a full Equality Impact Assessment first. And then they demand our respect in return for the utter lack of respect they’ve shown us!

  64. Pingback: Oi Nick and Margaret, We Pay Your Wages! | SouthWeb Org

  65. “Thanks for contacting us regarding ‘Nick and Margaret: We All Pay Your Benefits’ broadcast on the 11 July. We appreciate your feedback on the programme.

    The debate over how much benefit is enough to live on has never been so fierce in the UK, and the series takes this polarization in attitudes as its starting point. Our hope is that bringing both sides of the debate together will offer the opportunity for both sides to have their views challenged, and for them – and BBC One viewers – to have a deeper understanding of the realities of life on benefits.

    The series investigates the debate around benefits in a reasoned, unbiased and intelligent way, through the experiences of real taxpayers and real claimants. The first episode also includes a number of experts who contextualize the actual number of benefit claimants in the UK and the changes in attitudes towards them. We also went into detail on the reality of the increase in benefit claimants using food banks.

    The claimants were selected after an extensive and rigorous research process which involved speaking to hundreds of Ipswich residents, companies and charities. We chose articulate people who wanted to have their views challenged and were prepared to both defend their own position and listen to others. Each individual represents a different facet of the benefits debate: a single mum, a recent graduate, someone who had been unemployed for over a year and a long-term unemployed person who is also a recipient of disability benefit.

    The taxpayers were chosen because each of them had something in common with the benefit claimant they were being paired with – far from looking for conflict, we took great pains to ensure there was common ground between our pairings. In fact, two of the four taxpayers had themselves spent time on benefits. The experiment did not aim to represent all types of claimants nor all types of taxpayers, but for these individuals to be able to be more informed through the swaps. After the swap, two of the tax payers felt that the claimants got too much money in benefits, one felt they got the right amount and the other felt they should get more – a broad reaction which we reflected in detail in the programme.

    The second episode addresses the world of work and the challenges faced by the long term unemployed as the UK begins to recover from the economic downturn and asks what the value of work is in modern Britain.
    We’d like to assure you that we’ve registered your complaint on our audience log. This is an internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily and is available for viewing by all our staff. This includes all programme makers and presenters, along with our senior management. It ensures that your points, along with all other comments we receive, are circulated and considered across the BBC.
    Thanks again for getting in contact.
    Kind Regards[]BBC Complaints

    • @ Shirley Nott: Please reply to the BBC with the following question: “Can anyone in the pay of the current government truly claim to make unbiased programmes given the fact that they cannot afford to in case they lose the funding gained through the successful taxation of TV ownership?”

      • @Sheogorath ~ I would love to. The reply they (finally) sent me was from an email address it’s not possible to reply to – would need to go through complaints/comments process anew though …. The other thing I would ask is why they didn’t reply to my question(s) about on drawing a dividing line between ‘taxpayers’ and ‘claimants’ and pigeonholing people this way. (Although the answer is obviously that the reply was a pre-prepared generic answer to send out in all cases of comment/complaint). So glad my tv licence went west a while ago.

  66. Another Fine Mess

    Part 2 BBC1 9pm Tonight!

  67. Great article. Especially the bit about volunteering and parenting being work. Would love to ask Mr Cameron to define “work” to define “want to get on”

    The simple answer is the unconditional basic income.

    It makes economic, social and moral sense.

    It’s affordable and would lead to a true free market economy which Cameron & Co say they want.

    So what’s stopping them?

  68. The reply they (finally) sent me was from an email address it’s not possible to reply to – would need to go through complaints/comments process anew though.
    You went to the wrong part of the website is why. However, you can email the correct department directly by clicking this link.

  69. The second episode of this farce was one of the most repellent things I’ve ever seen. Using the infirm and the elderly to manipulate both Liam (as he worked with Stevie the careworker) and the viewer was odious.

    Debbie seems to think of herself as the new business guru and yet, despite making Kelly work a 12 hour day, still couldn’t bring herself to be magnanimous. How many office workers do 12 hour shifts?

    • (I’m getting SO behind with my in-box) The 2nd part was, as you say, utterly repellent and manipulative. Maximum finger-wagging potential was achieved by pairing-up the unemployed with people on the 2nd-lowest rung, who believe slaving for 12 hours a day is the only virtuous way to live. On £11 an hour, too. Liam was right when he pointed out (with her daughter’s agreement) that Stevie was putting her addiction to working before her family. Ouch, that must’ve stung! How much in debt must she be in, when £130 PER DAY isn’t enough; that she sees no scope for slacking off a bit to spend more time with her kids. She’s borderline OCD about work, the poor cow!

  70. greyhoundsmith

    Fellow sufferers. Got my post-Seetec ‘intense’ interview on Tuesday.. From now on I will always refer to my benefit as Unemployment Benefit (JSA). This will apply in conversation and correspondence. Why should I receive an ‘allowance’ from a system I have paid into since1979?
    JSA tagged on as an afterthought. A small semantic exercise but necessary. We must use language to fight our wicked overseers. Another word swirling around the Tory press is an ..ism. ‘Welfarism’. A favorite of repulsive Simon Heffer -Daily Mail. What we call..Social Security! Apparently there must be a fight against ‘Welfarism’. No fight for full employment then.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s